Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2001(2)AWC1494; (2001)2UPLBEC1149
s. r. singh, j. 1. bottom-line common questions of seminal importance that surface of determination in this bunch of writ petitions are two fold : firstly, whether the posts of principal in government aided private degree colleges/post graduate colleges affiliated or associated under the provisions of the u.p. state universities act. 1973, can be subsumed within the sweep of the u.p. public services (reservation for scheduled castes. scheduled tribes and other backward classes) act, 1994 (abbreviated to 'u.p. reservation act. 1994) and secondly, whether methodology adopted by the u.p.higher education services commission for screening out candidates, suffers from the taint of arbitrariness.2. the reliefs recapitulated in substance, arc that the advertisement no. 25 of 1998, the selections made pursuant to the said advertisement, and the guidelines formulated by the u.p. higher education services commission, be quashed and the commission be enjoined to re-advertise the posts sans applying there the rule of reservation as embodied in the u.p, reservation act. 1994 and prepare fresh guidelines for screening out the candidates taking into reckoning the qualifications as amended by the university grants commission.3. besides sri r. b. singhal and sri r,c. shukla, we have also heard sarvsri r.c. srivastava, r.n. singh and sri ashok khare, learned senior advocates appearing for petitioners in their respective cases and sri kripa shanker singh, standing counsel appearing for the state .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2005(2)ESC1436
v.k. shukla, j.1. in these bunch of writ petitions, claim of class iii employees and claim of class iv employees of recognised institution of madhyamik shiksha parishad, u.p. at allahabad is for issuing writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to enhance the age of superannuation of the petitioners from 60 to 62 years in same way and manner as it has been extended qua the teaching staff of the institution in terms of government order dated 4.2.2004.2. brief facts of the case as has been disclosed by the petitioners in the aforementioned writ petitions is that they have been appointed as class iii employee and class iv employees at duly recognised institutions of madhyamik shiksha parishad, u.p. at allahabad. contention of the petitioners is that in terms of regulation 21 of chapter iii of u.p. intermediate education act, 1921 age of superannuation of teachers and employees has been provided to be 60 years and once decision has been taken to enhance the age of superannuation of teachers from 60 to 62 years then for the purposes of superannuation teachers and other employees has to be treated as one class and no different treatment could be accorded to the petitioners as such petitioners have been discriminated, and writ of mandamus be issued extending the same benefit as has been extended to teachers in terms of government order dated 4.2.2004.3. from the side of respondents counter-affidavit has been filed and therein it has been asserted that as far as non- .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1998(4)AWC284
d. k. seth, j.1.the petitioner was engaged on a class iv post in the transport department. subsequently, pursuant to the provisions of u. p. transport department enforcement staff (group 'd') service rules, 1979, a selection was held for promotion of group 'd' staff to the post of enforcement constables sometimes in 1985. in the said selection, the petitioner was selected and was placed at serial no. 5 of the list on the basis of seniority along with one kamta prasad, who was placed at serial no. 1 of the said list. in the said list, the place of appointment was also indicated. according to the petitioner, the appointment was effected by a letter dated 28th may. 1985. subsequently, by an order dated 25.6.1985, the petitioner was reverted along with said kamta prasad on the alleged ground that at allahabad the post of enforcement constable was already filled up. therefore, it was assured that separate orders would be passed in respect of the petitioner which is contained in annexure-3. subsequently, pursuant to a fresh selection held sometimes in april. 1990 after the selection committee was constituted in 1989, a fresh selection was made, in which the petitioner had participated but was not selected. the petitioner, therefore, challenges the said selection and prays for quashing thereof on the ground that he having been selected earlier and that there had been an earlier selection, there is no scope for a fresh selection, 2. mr. ravi kant, learned counsel for the petitioner .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2001(1)AWC391; [2001(88)FLR416]; (2001)1UPLBEC492
s.r. singh, j.1. the question that calls for determination in this writ petition is as to whether the respondents have violated article 14 of the constitution in not counting the military service rendered by the petitioner in the indian army while determining his seniority, etc. in the u. p. civil service (executive)? incidentally the question arises as to whether the provisions of the u. p. non-technical (class-ii/group 'b') services (appointment of demobilised officers) rules, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the rules) is discriminatory and violative of article 14 of the constitution due to non-inclusion, within its purview, of noncommissioned officers who joined 'armed forces of the union' on or after november 1, 1962 but before january 10, 1968 and again on or after december 3, 1971 and released at any time thereafter? 2. the petitioner did m.a. in mathematics from allahabad university in the year 1962. on promulgation of external emergency due to the threat to the security andintegrity of the nation as a result of chinese aggression in november, 1962, the petitioner joined the indian army as a non-commissioned officer on 7.8.1964 without least thought of the career even though he was fully qualified to appear in the civil services examination. after completion of arduous military training, he was posted in western sector in the month of april, 1965 and there he participated in actual battle during indo-pak war in 1965 and was awarded medals - samar seva star, raksha .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(4)AWC3206
ashok bhushan, j.1. heard sri h.s.n. tripathi, counsel for the petitioner and sri ram prakash rai, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.2. counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged. both the parties have agreed that writ petition itself be finally disposed of at this stage.3. by this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 2nd july, 2001 (annexure-13 to the writ petition) by which petitioner's claim for regularisation in service has been rejected. further prayer has been made seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to deny the continuity of service and payment of regular salary on the post of clerk in the office of respondent no. 2 and to release withheld salary to the petitioner for the period between april, 1991 to 21st january, 1993.4. the facts of the case briefly stated are ; petitioner was appointed by order dated 2nd january, 1991 of inspector general (registration), u. p., allahabad as daily wage clerk. the appointment was purely temporary and for a limited period. the daily wage appointment was further extended by the orders dated 13th march, 1991 and 29th april, 1991. the order dated 29th april, 1991 provided that petitioner is appointed on consolidated wages of rs. 1,000 per month and his appointment is extended till 31st october, 1991. the petitioner has further stated that he was not paid salary from april, 1991 and he submitted a representation on 18th december, 1991 to the inspector .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1999(4)AWC3079
m. katju, j.1. this writ petition has been filed against the impugned judgment of the central administrative tribunal dated 6.11.97 (annexure-11 to the petition) praying for a mandamus directing the respondents to consider the upgradation of the petitioners to the post of superintendent of central excise on the basis of their total length of service in the department disregarding the seniority list prepared by the department.2. we have heard learned counsel for the parties. the petitioners are all inspectors in the central excise department who were appointed prior to 2.8.82 as stated in paragraph 2 of the writ petition. it appears that the ministry of finance, government of india issued a letter dated 10.9.96 (annexure-1 to the petition) addressed to all the heads of department under the central board of excise and customs and conveyed the sanction for upgradation of 716 posts of inspectors to the post of superintendent in various central excise departments. thereafter the central government issued a letter dated 23.7.96 to all the commissioners of the central excise mentioning the manner in which the upgradation is to be done. the petitioners have urged that they were entitled to be appointed against the upgraded post of superintendent on the basis of their length of service but instead their juniors have been appointed superintendents whereas the petitioners have remained as inspector. the petitioners' contention is that the entire service as inspector is to be seen and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2002(2)AWC1225
s. rafat alam, j.1. this special-appeal is preferred against the judgment and order of the learned single judge dated 19.1.2001 in writ petition no. 2354 of 2001 whereby the learned single judge dismissed the writ petition challenging the office order notice dated 23.12.2000 retiring the petitioner with effect from 31.1.2001 on attaining the age of 58 years.2. the short question involved in the present appeal is as to whether the age of retirement of consolidation lekhpal is 60 years or 58 years?3. we have heard smt. poonam srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and sri u. k. pandey, learned standing counsel on behalf of the state-respondents. with the permission of the court, they have also filed their written arguments, which are on record.4. it appears that the petitioner-appellant was appointed as consolidation lekhpal on 11.10.1979 in the pay scale of rs. 330-7-365-8-381-405-9-450 in the district of basti. it is not in dispute that his date of birth is 10.1.1943 . he was however, served with the office order/notice dated 23rd january. 2001 informing that in view of rule 5 of volume ii. part ii to iv of financial hand book and also in view of the instructions issued from time to time by the state government, he would retire on 31.1.2001 on attaining 58 years of age. being aggrieved, the petitioner challenged the aforesaid order notice before this court by moving writ petition no. 2354 of 2001 on the ground, inter alia, that the post of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2003(2)AWC1306; (2003)2UPLBEC1390
v.m. sahai, j.1. the petitioner, who is working as head of history department since 1974, has filed this petition for direction to the respondents to promote him as principal with effect from 22.8.1997, the date on which juniors to him have been appointed as principal, degree college. he was appointed on 30.8.1972 as lecturer, history department, government raza post graduate college, rampur. on 22.11.1974 he was promoted as head of history department in government degree college, lambgaon, district tehri garhwal. he joined on 30.11.1974. the state government also issued a notification on 18.3.1975 to the effect that the petitioner along with others had been promoted as head of history department on ad hoc basis. on 3.9.1976, he was transferred as head of department, degree college, mahmoodabad, sitapur. he was transferred in may, 1981 to government degree college, chakia, varanasi as head of history department where he joined on 15.9.1982. he was promoted as principal, government degree college, chakia, varanasi for a short period, which was an officiating arrangement and came to an end after the regular principal joined. the petitioner was again transferred in may, 1985 to government post graduate college, kotdwar, pauri garhwal where he joined on 14.6.1985 as head of history department. he was again transferred on 30.6.1987 to government raza post graduate college, rampur. from 30.1.1990 to 20.7.1990, the petitioner worked as head of history department in government degree .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2001(1)AWC562; [2001(89)FLR560]; (2001)2UPLBEC1868
m. quddusi, j.1. heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.2. the instant writ petition has been filed against the order dated 17th october, 2000 passed by district horticulture officer. barabanki, by means of which the petitioner who was working on daily wages basis has been denied regularisation on group 'c' post on the ground that he was not appointed directly against any available vacancy.3. the petitioner was appointed as typist on daily wages basis. it is admitted case of the opposite parties that he is continuously working on daily wages basis since july, 1990 but his engagement was not made against any available vacancy in group c post and was only engaged on muster roll. his representation has been rejected in this regard which was directed to be decided vide order dated 13.1.2000, passed by this court in his earlier writ petition no. 5094 (s/s) of 1990, in which it was directed that since the petitioner is working on dally wages basis since 1987, therefore, his case is squarely covered under rule 4 of the u. p. regularisation for daily wages appointment for group c post (outside the purview of u. p. public service commission) rules, 1998 and he is to be considered for regularisation.4. the district horticulture officer, interpreted rule 4 (1) to the effect that any person who was directly appointed against any available vacancy shall be considered for appointment. since the petitioner was not appointed against any available vacancy in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2001(1)AWC238; [2001(88)FLR146]; (2001)1UPLBEC131
v. m. sahai, j.1. janta uchchatar madhyamik vidyalaya. arkauli, moradabad (in brief institution) was recognised on 26.4.1968 as higher secondary school. it was taken in grant-in-aid list under the uttar pradesh junior high schools (payment of salaries to teachers and other employees) act. 1978 (in brief act 1978) with effect from 1.5.1979. the institution was upgraded and granted unaided recognition as high school on 24.9.1993. permission to open class-lx was granted on 4.12.1993. after upgradation of the institution as high school, a writ petition was filed before this court being civil misc. writ petition no. 947 of 1995 and under the interim order of this court dated 11.1.1995, salary of teachers and staff of the institution is being paid from the grant-in-aid received by the institution under act 1978, till the institution is brought in the grant-in-aid list of high school. 2. after upgradation of the institution as high school, one clerk working in the institution was dismissed from service. the post of clerk fell vacant. the management issued an advertisement on 2.4.1999 in newspaper 'nav amar bharat' inviting applications for appointmenton the post of clerk. the petitioner applied and he was selected by the selection committee on 24.4.1999. appointment letter was issued to him on 22.4.1999. he joined on 23.4.1999. the management sent the papers of appointment of the petitioner for granting financial approval to district basic education officer (in brief bsa) who .....
Tag this Judgment!